About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
. a big bank or two fail. this causes a run on american money market funds which have exposure of about a trillion dollars to european banks. and we find ourselves very quickly back at a moment very much like 2008. do you find a scenario like this to be plausible? and if so, what has dodd-frank accomplished? >> maybe i can start and others can join in. first of all, i think it's a terrific and i think central important question. i do think there is real risk right now, as there has been for many months now, that crisis in europe hurts the -- not just the european banking sector but the u.s. banking sector and the u.s. financial sector. the money market fund system is still, i think, not fully resolved. that is i think the sec's changes under rule 287 that improve the liquidity position of money market funds is good. the bazzel liquidity rules that will kick into place for the banking sector are good and will help. the capital margin and collateral requirements in the repo sector will also help significantly. and weaknesses -- i'm sorry, the last i would point out the significant capital
and a big part of this community. i was grateful to see him here today before i turn over to arianna who i think is an expert on journalism and editorial, i want to go through a few points of real big things that we're betting on as a company, not talk about aol but let's talk about the things we see in the future and why we're putting such an investment in journalism. number one question i get from wall street all the time is why journalism, why are you choosing when the rest of the world seems to be going away from journalism? why are you opening up a thousand patches? why did you buy the "huffington post"? and i think the things i'm about to talk about are a core essence of what we believe them. the first is really a bit of the human needs stage which is, if you woke up and today was your first day on planet earth, what would you knows and what would you see? i think there's some very stark things. one is there's four or 5 billion phones in peoples pockets and a lot of smart phone growth across the world, which means people are going to be connected full-time with information all the ti
and making us a better nation? let me introduce to you another dreamer. this is jose migana. a big smile on his face. jose brought to the united states from mexico when he was two years old. he grew up in arizona. he graduated as the valedictorian of his high school class. he enrolled in arizona state university, became the first member of his family to attend college. but then arizona passed a law prohibiting public universities from giving financial aid or in-state tuition rates to undocumented students. hundreds of students were forced to drop out of school. but jose persevered. he found his calling on the speech and debate team where he ranked fifth in the nation. and in 2008, jose migana graduated summa cum laude from arizona state university with a major in business management. jose couldn't work because of his legal status so he went to law school. next year, jose will graduate from baylor university law school in waco, texas. despite his potential to give to this country, jose will not be able to work as a lawyer because of his undocumented status. he sent me a letter and here's
, but it means, mr. president, that we can't be raising taxes on the job creators, and there is a big debate right now about how do we get ourselves out of this fiscal mess. i would submit to my colleagues that the real issue here is spending. if you go back to the foundation of our country, the year 1800, we were only spending 2% of our entire economic output on the government, the federal government. this year we're going to spend 24% to 25%. the historical average over the past 40 years is about 20.6%. we are dramatically higher in terms of what we are spending on our federal government as a percentage of our entire economy. to me, clearly, we don't have a revenue issue here in washington. we have a spending issue. which would suggest that we ought to get after spending, after federal spending, particularly spending that is -- is duplicative, redundant, there are so many things in the federal government that we spend money on that we need to get that waste and that -- and all those types of wasteful spending out of our spending here in washington, d.c., but we also have to focus on those
to see the quick video i promised. jfc engages a big tent of stakeholders, a big tent in shake holders because as i mentioned, a broken framework fabric of society requires as i mentioned a patchwork of everybody being brought together. not just a small group, not just one small sector, not just the military or not just the political actors but all the sectors coming together including the community, government, society, all people who need to buy into this system and be part of it and agree. and have that social contract. and the week before last, we published a case study, it's thick, a case study on jsd and tleeshsz a smaller version on our website but we tried someone who was involved walk step-by-step to paint the picture and just distill it and just a few policy recommendations. jsd, despite its name dialog is not just talking. it's not just talking and then leaving. it's really a vehicle or a means to do things that are vital to strengthening rule of law and post-conflict environment. there are a number of different things. it all has to be dependent upon the country context and
should we allow our tax dollars to buy chinese solar panels? makes no sense to me. >> how about your big ridge? tell us about that. [laughter] >> it does seem as if, if anything, the politics, as dynamic as it might be. i certainly agree on that. might be going in the opposite direction. i'm talking presidential politics, the bloomberg breakfast the other day in which it seems as if the clinical strategy of the administration is to avoid a discussion of jobs to the unemployment rate at all. but let's talk about some of the specifics if we can. maybe patrick ewing talk a little bit about in more detail about the china trade issue, the environment for getting comfortable with china -- tougher with china. >> i'm a member of the u.s.-china economic review commission. this is a bipartisan congressional think tank on china. we've issued a number of reports, almost all have been unanimous, republicans and democrats seen it in exactly the right. i'm a member of the commission. i'm not speaking for the commission at this thing. our website is -- everything we do is up there. let me just quickly g
on it but i do know that it was in an effort to try to make sure that the rates that the two big providers in mississippi, and, of course, energy was heavily invested in louisiana as well. but i don't know the details on that but i do know. >> mr. mack so, have you had any experience with this kind of think? >> we have not. >> mr. serino, i'm going to the i am going to continue on this. chairman, i would love to talk to you about it and senator mccaskill and i have been talking about it. you know, if this community would've happened to have a municipal provider, let's say they paid 10% under the stafford act of the repair costs, they would be passing along to .5 million to the ratepayers instead of 25 million. court if they have a 75, 25 sure, they'll be passing along 6.2 the ratepayers instead of 25 million. those rate players pay federal taxes in exactly the same way that the neighboring community of carthage that has a municipal utility pays federal taxes. we have more experience with this with devastating i storms. we have miles and miles of polls broken off, and the mileage that is in
be no big deal? when every financial expert, investor, business leader and banker in the country and even every reasonable member of your own political party is telling you the consequences of default would be catastrophic, it's time to start listening. why? because default won't just roil the financial markets, pushing interest rates higher and tank the stock markets, it will affect every american's wallet as well. there are a few things that will happen. social security checks and veterans' benefits and paychecks to our troops would stop. some of the most vulnerable americans would be placed at risk. our promise to the men and women who would protect this nation so bravely and those who protect it today would be broken. we would not be able to make payments to our military. payments on our national debt would stop. american investments in retirement accounts would be decimated. millions of americans could lose their jobs. interest rates would rise, not only for the government but for ordinary americans as well. those americans will pay more for their mortgages, they will pay more to use
had in my office yesterday, whether he knew about it or not. i don't think he did. so that's the big corporate structure and there's always the middle people, but they eventually everything is money on on account, on a report and companies are responsible for what they do. why do they do this? >> well, mr. chairman, mr. graham next response will be enlightening. we wouldn't disagree with the perspective of what we've seen from consumers. there's an obvious financial opportunity for the carriers because they are receiving a portion of those charges that ultimately end up on dean consumer's phone bills. >> not that much. >> not that much, but this has been going on over 15 years. over that period of time, it adds up to some money. what we need to look at is the fact that landline service is a declining surveys and many people are now relying solely on their wireless carriers to provide them with their phone service. and though, and maybe the dad here is one of our last opportunities to bring some money. i don't think that's the proper way to look at it from a business to, but that's re
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9